Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 131 /Thursday, July 9, 1998 / Notices 37095

each state and territory coastal nonpoint

program. The Proposed Findings

Documents, Environmental

Assessments, and Findings of No

Significant Impact prepared for the

coastal nonpoint programs submitted by

Alabama, Alaska, California,

Connecticut, Hawaii, Louisiana, and

Washington were made available for

public comment in the Federal Register.

Public comments were received and

responses prepared on the Alabama,

Alaska, California, Connecticut, Hawaii,

and Louisiana programs.

In accordance with the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

NOAA has also prepared a Record of

Decision on each program. The

requirements of 40 CFR Parts 1500–1508

(Council on Environmental Quality

(CEQ) regulations to implement the

National Environmental Policy Act)

apply to the preparation of a Record of

Decision. Specifically, 40 CFR section

1505.2 requires an agency to prepare a

concise public record of decision at the

time of its decision on the action

proposed in an environmental impact

statement. The Record of Decision shall:

(1) state what the decision was; (2)

identify all alternatives considered,

specifying the alternative considered to

be environmentally preferable; and (3)

state whether all practicable means to

avoid or minimize environmental harm

from the alternative selected have been

adopted.

In March 1996, NOAA published a

programmatic environmental impact

statement (PEIS) that assessed the

environmental impacts associated with

the approval of state and territory

coastal nonpoint programs. The PEIS

forms the basis for the environmental

assessments NOAA has prepared for

each state and territorial coastal

nonpoint program submitted to NOAA

and EPA for approval. In the PEIS,

NOAA determined that the approval

and conditional approval of coastal

nonpoint in any significant adverse

environmental impacts and that these

programs will not result actions will

have an overall beneficial effect on the

environment. Because the PEIS served

only as a ‘‘framework for decision’’ on

individual state and territorial coastal

nonpoint programs, and no actual

decision was made following its

publication, NOAA has prepared a

NEPA Record of Decision on each

individual state and territorial program

submitted for review.

Copies of the Findings Documents,

Responses to Comments, and Records of

Decision may be obtained upon request

from: Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief, Coastal

Programs Division (N/ORM3), Office of

Ocean and Coastal Resource

Management, NOS, NOAA, 1305 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, Maryland,

20910, tel. (301) 713–3155, x195.

(Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog 11.419

Coastal Zone Management Program

Administration)

Dated: July 6, 1998.

Captain Evelyn J. Fields,

Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for

Ocean Services and Coastal Zone

Management, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration.

Robert H. Wayland, III,

Director, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and

Watersheds, Environmental Protection

Agency.

[FR Doc. 98–18202 Filed 7–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–12–M

COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS

Notice of Meeting

The next meeting of the Commission

of Fine Arts is scheduled for 23 July

1998 at 10:00 AM in the Commission’s

offices at the National Building Museum

(Pension Building), Suite 312, Judiciary

Square, 441 F Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20001. The meeting will focus on

a variety of projects affecting the

appearance of the city.

Inquiries regarding the agenda and

requests to submit written or oral

statements should be addressed to

Charles H. Atherton, Secretary,

Commission of Fine Arts, at the above

address or call 202–504–2200.

Individuals requiring sign language

interpretation for the hearing impaired

should contact the Secretary at least 10

days before the meeting date.

Dated in Washington, D.C. 29 June 1998.

Charles H. Atherton,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–18262 Filed 7–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6330–01–M

COMMITTEE FOR THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE

AGREEMENTS

Amendment to Quota and Visa

Requirements to Increase the

Exemption for Properly Marked

Commercial Sample Shipments From

Various Countries

July 6, 1998.

AGENCY: Committee for the

Implementation of Textile Agreements

(CITA).

ACTION: Issuing a directive to the

Commissioner of Customs increasing

the exemption for properly marked

commercial sample shipments.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 1, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Brian F. Fennessy, International Trade

Specialist, Office of Textiles and

Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce,

(202) 482–3400.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority: Section 204 of the Agricultural

Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854);

Executive Order 11651 of March 3, 1972, as

amended.

Currently, shipments of properly

marked commercial samples valued at

U.S.$250 or less do not require a visa for

entry into the United States and are not

charged to applicable quotas. The

Committee for the Implementation of

Textile Agreements has reviewed the

dollar limitation and has decided to

increase the exemption from U.S.$250

to U.S.$800 for properly marked

commercial sample shipments exported

on or after September 1, 1998.

In addition to other requirements,

U.S. Customs guidelines require that

each imported sample must be indelibly

marked ‘‘SAMPLE’’ in large letters in

specific locations depending on the

imported article.

In the letter published below, the

Chairman of CITA directs the

Commissioner of Customs to amend

existing visa requirements.

Troy H. Cribb,

Chairman, Committee for the Implementation

of Textile Agreements.

Committee for the Implementation of Textile

Agreements

July 6, 1998.

Commissioner of Customs,

Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC

20229.

Dear Commissioner: This directive

amends, but does not cancel, all directives

issued to you which establish textile and

apparel export visa requirements.

The Committee for the Implementation of

Textile Agreements has decided to increase

the dollar limitation for properly marked

commercial sample shipments from U.S.$250

to U.S.$800. Effective on September 1, 1998,

for products exported on or after September

1, 1998, shipments of properly marked

commercial samples valued at U.S.$800 or

less do not require a visa for entry into the

United States and shall not be charged to

applicable quotas.

Shipments entered or withdrawn from

warehouse according to this directive which

are not properly marked shall be subject to

applicable quota and visa requirements.

The Committee for the Implementation of

Textile Agreements has determined that this

action falls within the foreign affairs

exception to the rulemaking provisions of 5

U.S.C. 553(a)(1).
37096 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 131 /Thursday, July 9, 1998 / Notices

Sincerely,

Troy H. Cribb,

Chairman, Committee for the Implementation

of Textile Agreements.

[FR Doc. 98–18234 Filed 7–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DR–F

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Reinstatement of Small Business SetAsides for Certain Acquisitions Under

the Small Business Competitiveness

Demonstration Program

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: Notice of reinstatement of small

business set-asides under the Small

Business Competitiveness

Demonstration Program.

SUMMARY: The Director of Defense

Procurement has reinstated the use of

small business set-aside procedures for

certain construction acquisitions issued

by the Departments of the Army and

Navy. Included in the reinstatement are

solicitations issued under Standard

Industrial Category Major Group 15 and

Standard Industrial Category Code 1629

(Navy only).

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 17, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Michael Sipple, OUSD (A&T),

Director of Defense Procurement,

Contract Policy Administration, Room

3C838, 3060 Defense Pentagon,

Washington, DC 20301–3060, telephone

(703) 695–8567.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office

of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP)

implemented Title VII of Pub. L. 100–

656 (15 U.S.C. 644 note) by issuance of

the ‘‘Small Business Competitiveness

Demonstration Program Test Plan’’ on

August 31, 1989, amended April 16,

1993. The program was further

implemented in Subpart 19.10 of the

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)

and Subpart 219.10 of the Defense FAR

Supplement (DFARS).

Under the program, small business

set-asides were initially suspended for

certain designated industry groups

(DIGs). Agencies are required by

paragraphs III.D.2.a and IV.A.4. of the

OFPP test plan to reinstate the use of

small business set-asides whenever the

small business awards under any

designated industry group falls below

40 percent or whenever small business

awards under an Individual Standard

Industrial Classification (SIC) Code

within the designated industry group

falls below 35 percent. Reinstatement is

to be limited to the organizational

elements (in the case of DoD, the

individual military departments or other

components) that failed to meet the

small business participation goals.

For the 12 months ending March

1998, DoD awards in the industries

shown below fell below the 40 percent

(SIC Major Group 15) or 35 percent (SIC

Code 1629) thresholds. Accordingly,

pursuant to DFARS 219.1006(b)(2), the

Director of Defense Procurement has

directed reinstatement of small business

set aside procedures for solicitations

that involve the industry categories

shown below. The reinstatement applies

to solicitations issued by the applicable

buying activities on or after June 17,

1998, or as soon thereafter as

practicable:

Industry Applicable to

Construction:.

Major Group 15 (including SIC 1521, 1522, 1531, 1541, and 1542) All Army and Navy Activities.

Major Group 16—SIC, Code 1629 only ............................................. All Navy Activities.

Consistent with the OFPP test plan,

this reinstatement of set-asides will be

periodically reviewed for continuation.

Small business set-asides were

reinstated DoD-wide for the DIG titled

‘‘Architectural and Engineering

Services,’’ by memorandum of

September 30, 1991. That reinstatement

remains in effect.

Michele P. Peterson,

Executive Editor, Defense Acquisition

Regulations Council.

[FR Doc. 98–18097 Filed 7–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Docket Nos. EA–105–A–CN, EA–168–A and

EA–187]

Applications To Export Electric

Energy; NorAm Energy Services,

PG&E Energy, Merchant Energy Group

AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of applications.

SUMMARY: NorAm Energy Services, Inc.

(NES) has applied for renewal of its

authority to transmit electric energy

from the United States to Canada

pursuant to section 202(e) of the Federal

Power Act. PG&E Energy TradingPower, L.P. (PG&E) has applied to

amend its authorization to export

electric energy to Canada by adding

additional transmission facilities, and

Merchant Energy Group of the

Americas, Inc. (MEGA) has applied for

authority to transmit electric energy to

Canada.

DATES: Comments, protests or requests

to intervene must be submitted on or

before August 10, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments, protests or

requests to intervene should be

addressed as follows: Office of Coal &

Power Im/Ex (FE–27), Office of Fossil

Energy, U.S. Department of Energy,

1000 Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, DC 20585–0350 (FAX 202–

287–5736).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ellen Russell (Program Office) 202–586–

9624 or Michael Skinker (Program

Attorney) 202–586–6667.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exports of

electricity from the United States to a

foreign country are regulated and

require authorization under section

202(e) of the Federal Power Act (FPA)

(16 U.S.C. 824a(e)).

The Office of Fossil Energy (FE) of the

Department of Energy (DOE) has

received applications from the following

companies for authorization to export

electric energy to Canada:

Applicant Application

date Docket No.

NorAm Energy Services Inc ...................................................................................................................... 6/18/98 EA–105–A–CN

PG&E Energy Trading-Power, L.P ............................................................................................................ 6/23/98 EA–168–A

Merchant Energy Group of the Americas, Inc ........................................................................................... 6/25/98 EA–187